Hulyss Bowman wrote:
Death and the Maiden - Again at ISO 1000, hand held.

At first I did this photo with my D700 + Zeiss glass ... but I did the same just after with the DP2 Merrill, as a test at High ISO. This photo have for me the same charm as the other. It is different, more pictural, already deteriorated by a natural grain.

I think you should try High ISO with the M. It have something, for real.

I have been tempted, particularly after seeing the recent $1799 price at B&H. The main thing holding me back is the availability of lenses which could take full advantage of the sensor. Both the DP1 and DP2 Merrill have lenses which I'm not sure could be equaled with any current interchangeable lens when used on the SD1M.

Not the same beast, not the same rendering, not the same softness or perspective on the focal plane. We can't really compare, at the end APS-C and FF.

Sorry, I like better Nikon version. DP2M shows that kind of not regular grain that I hate on digital, a mix of banding and grain particularly enhanced into the shadows. If you start instead from a clean file, you can always add your favorite disturb by any software.

Got back my first lab print, blew this up to 48" wide, sky shows smooth transitions (a polarizer was used) stunning clarity in the golf greens, grass, everything is just beautiful in this print and the client will be happy, too.

Have you guys noticed a sort of "cut off" effect in the shadows with regard to gradation? I've noticed the effect in a number of comparisons I have made and I can't seem to bring out the dark tones regardless of the settings used in Sigmaphoto (increasing X3 fill light and/or "shadow" does not reveal subtle dark tones). I believe this effect is part of what gives that "foveon" look (deep, dramatic shadows with little gradation) but there are times I would like to see more dynamic range and detail in the shadows.

Tariq Gibran wrote:
Have you guys noticed a sort of "cut off" effect in the shadows with regard to gradation? I've noticed the effect in a number of comparisons I have made and I can't seem to bring out the dark tones regardless of the settings used in Sigmaphoto (increasing X3 fill light and/or "shadow" does not reveal subtle dark tones). I believe this effect is part of what gives that "foveon" look (deep, dramatic shadows with little gradation) but there are times I would like to see more dynamic range and detail in the shadows.

What I've seen is that the RAW processing removes all color information from shadows below a certain cutoff (shadows contain luminance detail, but are monochromatic). I suspect that this is done to prevent wild chroma noise in the shadows, where noise makes reliable color reconstruction nearly impossible (related to why DP2M color images at higher ISO are terrible, but still hold up reasonably well in B&W). Does this sound like what you are seeing?

mpmendenhall wrote:
What I've seen is that the RAW processing removes all color information from shadows below a certain cutoff (shadows contain luminance detail, but are monochromatic). I suspect that this is done to prevent wild chroma noise in the shadows, where noise makes reliable color reconstruction nearly impossible (related to why DP2M color images at higher ISO are terrible, but still hold up reasonably well in B&W). Does this sound like what you are seeing?

I cannot confirm color information is missing in shadows. With a -2 stops exposure there is still a lot of color information in the a an b Lab channels. But I am sure Sigma is trying to hide noise for us as much as possible.

mpmendenhall wrote:
What I've seen is that the RAW processing removes all color information from shadows below a certain cutoff (shadows contain luminance detail, but are monochromatic). I suspect that this is done to prevent wild chroma noise in the shadows, where noise makes reliable color reconstruction nearly impossible (related to why DP2M color images at higher ISO are terrible, but still hold up reasonably well in B&W). Does this sound like what you are seeing?

I'm seeing that effect as well, but also this dramatic cutoff in dark tones (as if the shadows are rendered with a dropout of say zone 2 and 3). Here is an example (and I actually attempted to recover some of the shadow detail from the Sigma file).
First the scene as rendered by the DP1 Merrill:

Now crops showing 100% details from the DP1M on the left as compared to reduced crops from the Nikon D800E + 28 1.8G on the right:

The Sigma DP1M images appear as if a curve has been applied which had the effect of increasing mid tone contrast at the expense of loosing shadow detail (think S-curve). The effect can look really good overall but I think I would prefer having control over creating that look rather than it being the default.

I cannot confirm color information is missing in shadows. With a -2 stops exposure there is still a lot of color information in the a an b Lab channels. But I am sure Sigma is trying to hide noise for us as much as possible.

Herb

It would be pretty obviously awful if color information was gone at -2 stops; that's more like mid-tones than deep shadows. If I have time this evening, I'll try some color test shots at deeper underexposure (unless someone beats me to it). My (not yet carefully confirmed) feeling is that the color threshold kicks in at about -4+ stops at ISO100 (similar to shooting at ISO1600+, where image color gets pretty marginal).

Tariq Gibran wrote:
I'm seeing that effect as well, but also this dramatic cutoff in dark tones (as if the shadows are rendered with a dropout of say zone 2 and 3). Here is an example (and I actually attempted to recover some of the shadow detail from the Sigma file).

...

The Sigma DP1M images appear as if a curve has been applied which had the effect of increasing mid tone contrast at the expense of loosing shadow detail (think S-curve). The effect can look really good overall but I think I would prefer having control over creating that look rather than it being the default....Show more →

The effect looks to me like setting the black point too high. Unfortunately, SPP doesn't provide direct control over this. Perhaps the images would look a bit more like what you expect from the D800 if you lowered the black point in other software after exporting to TIFF16? I'm not sure if there's any actual lost shadow luminance detail in the crops you're showing, just the combination of losing color (plant shadows black/grey instead of dark green) and a slightly over-aggressive black point (where the D800 doesn't have more detail, but a slightly lighter-than-pure-black tone).

What Mr. Gilbran's examples (Just ABOVE) clearly reveal to me is (1) better spatial resolution as evidenced in blades of grass against the light grey path (2) better contrast AND spatial resolution on the fire hydrant and (3) a more realistic appearance in shadow detail for the SIGMA DP Merrill images vs. the NIKON D800E images.

As for the color checker/Lightroom examples above I'm far less sanguine over any color channel weaknesses since these examples aren't from camera RAW results. the comment that SIGMA is attempting to "Hide noise" is pejorative in nature and as such should be ignored on its face.

As for the known Bayer mosaic limitations, modern photographers have been diverted from the truth over time that the Bayer methodology inherently reduces per pixel spatial resolution and with an anti-aliasing filter further lowers the effective sensor resolution. In other words 24 mega pixels isn't what it seems.

The market leaders are now reduced to adding "Features" like PERSISTENCE (SONY's new RX1 6 frame stacked noise reducer). Never mind this trick was first used in the early 1900's to stack film negs at Lowell Observatory while studying Mars. Talk about hiding noise!

SIGMA is catching a lift from their new cameras and one can see them offering a CSC mirrorless body product. If they are smart SIGMA will first offer an M-Mount, then an APS-C monochrome sensor (FOVEON without filters) in order to threaten the Leica MONOCHROM body.

Life is good for those wanting more truth in sensing coupled with jacket-pocket cameras.

mpmendenhall wrote:
The effect looks to me like setting the black point too high. Unfortunately, SPP doesn't provide direct control over this. Perhaps the images would look a bit more like what you expect from the D800 if you lowered the black point in other software after exporting to TIFF16? I'm not sure if there's any actual lost shadow luminance detail in the crops you're showing, just the combination of losing color (plant shadows black/grey instead of dark green) and a slightly over-aggressive black point (where the D800 doesn't have more detail, but a slightly lighter-than-pure-black tone).

It's a very strange thing because if one lowers the contrast in Sigma Photo as much as possible, export as you say and then edit in PS, there is still this artificially increased contrast in the shadows which does in part look like an imposed high black point - but there seems to be no way around it.

sector99 wrote:
What Mr. Gilbran's examples (Just ABOVE) clearly reveal to me is (1) better spatial resolution as evidenced in blades of grass against the light grey path (2) better contrast AND spatial resolution on the fire hydrant and (3) a more realistic appearance in shadow detail for the SIGMA DP Merrill images vs. the NIKON D800E images.

As for the color checker/Lightroom examples above I'm far less sanguine over any color channel weaknesses since these examples aren't from camera RAW results. the comment that SIGMA is attempting to "Hide noise" is pejorative in nature and as such should be ignored on its face.

As for the known Bayer mosaic limitations, modern photographers have been diverted from the truth over time that the Bayer methodology inherently reduces per pixel spatial resolution and with an anti-aliasing filter further lowers the effective sensor resolution. In other words 24 mega pixels isn't what it seems.

The market leaders are now reduced to adding "Features" like PERSISTENCE (SONY's new RX1 6 frame stacked noise reducer). Never mind this trick was first used in the early 1900's to stack film negs at Lowell Observatory while studying Mars. Talk about hiding noise!

SIGMA is catching a lift from their new cameras and one can see them offering a CSC mirrorless body product. If they are smart SIGMA will first offer an M-Mount, then an APS-C monochrome sensor (FOVEON without filters) in order to threaten the Leica MONOCHROM body.

Life is good for those wanting more truth in sensing coupled with jacket-pocket cameras....Show more →

"Mr Gibran"...oh, I hate that!

"truth in sensing" Man, I can't wait until the election is over!!!

I've done a bit of back to back testing between the DP1M and the D800E with the 28 1.8G over the past week and, overall, the DP1M acquits itself quite well. A few things I have noticed though....when reducing the size of the D800E image to match that of the DP1M image, any advantage of the D800E's increased resolution is lost - no big surprise - and often the Sigma image will appear more detailed. But, if you interpolate up/ or print the DP1M to match the size of the D800E, the D800E image is obviously better and shows far more natural looking detail when the lens is up to the task.. That last point is important because I found that the Nikkor 28 1.8G is not always up to the task (mostly due to field curvature it would seem).

The following is my personal finding sofar and maybe not the absolute truth.
SPP just builds in a tone curve when processing RAW depending on the color mode choice. Whatever combination you choose you cannot get back to a linear curve. Even with fill light and or contrast adjustments. Probably to prevent seeing more noise than Sigma likes us to see.
You can of course apply a new curve on a processed tif but at the risk of seeing unwanted artifacts.
One of the really strong points of the new Nikon's is there ability to push the shadows very far without introducing these artifact. This will remain a mission impossible for the Sigma files right now